National
Advocacy groups mark Banned Books Week
‘Book bans have no place in our democracy’
People across the country from Sept. 22-28 are observing Banned Books Week, which has taken on added significance amid a surge of censorship efforts.
Banned Books Week, organized by PFLAG and a coalition of other advocacy groups, literary organizations, and educational institutions, seeks to raise awareness about efforts to remove content from public libraries, schools, and bookstores.
The current wave of book bans, which began intensifying in 2021, is driven primarily by conservative groups who disproportionately target titles featuring the voices and experiences of LGBTQ people and people of color.
“This is part of an organized effort to divide our communities by stoking fears against LGBTQ+ people, Black people, and immigrants,” PFLAG Vice President of Advocacy Katie Blair said. “[It] is targeted not only to banning books and censoring schools, but to infiltrating the lives of LGBTQ+ people and those who love them.”
While LGBTQ books have always been a target of book bans, censorship efforts in recent years are more focused on restricting access to LGBTQ content than in the past.
The Washington Post reports “LGBTQ books were the targets of between less than 1 and 3 percent of book challenges filed in schools” from the 2000s to the early 2010s. In 2022, however, 45.5 percent of unique titles that were challenged were written by or about LGBTQ people.
“Book bans have no place in our democracy,” the Congressional Equality Caucus said in a post to its X account.
Book bans have no place in our democracy.
During #BannedBooksWeek, we’re proud to stand with the authors, teachers, librarians, and readers who constantly stand up and say #LetFreedomRead! pic.twitter.com/T4uhCfnzjN
— Congressional Equality Caucus (@EqualityCaucus) September 22, 2024
On the American Library Association’s 2023 list of the 10 most challenged books, seven books featured LGBTQ voices; with Maia Kobabe’s “Gender Queer,” George M. Johnson’s “All Boys Aren’t Blue,” and Juno Dawson’s “This Book is Gay” topping the list.
The consequences of restricting access to LGBTQ stories and voices are far reaching especially for young people, Blair said.
“These bans contribute to the erasure of our communities and our histories, and all our stories deserve to be told. We believe that all students deserve the freedom to learn. They deserve to be able to develop their critical thinking skills, to be in schools that are open and affirming,” she said.
Deborah Caldwell-Stone, the director of the ALA’s Office of Intellectual Freedom, said another difference in the current wave of censorship is that most calls to censor books in school libraries and public libraries are now driven by organized advocacy groups.
She explained that in the past, most book challenges were initiated by parents and guardians who were concerned about a particular book their child was reading and brought those concerns to a teacher or librarian.
“But now we’re seeing organized groups or their spokespersons showing up at board meetings demanding the censorship of sometimes hundreds of titles all at once. And we’re seeing state legislatures pass laws that are intended to remove hundreds of books, if not thousands of books, all at once, from library shelves,” she said.
Between Jan. 1 and Aug. 31, 2024, ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom tracked 1,128 unique titles targeted for censorship. While this number marks a decline from the 1,915 titles challenged during the same period in 2023, it remains far higher than pre-2020 levels, when challenges hovered between 200 and 300 unique titles annually.
Moreover, PEN America, which tracks the total number of book bans rather than unique titles, counted more than 10,000 books that were banned in public schools during the 2023-2024 school year, nearly triple the amount from the previous year. Both ALA and PEN America’s reports exclude instances of soft censorship, where libraries and organizations preemptively avoid purchasing certain books or restrict access due to fear of potential challenges.
According to PEN America, around 8,000 books were banned in Florida and Iowa alone. Both states passed laws in recent years restricting access to books in schools that depict or describe sex. The vague language of the laws has drawn criticism for exacerbating soft censorship, and has often been interpreted to ban books with discussions of gender and LGBTQ identities.
Vera Eidelman, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, said, it is “not clear what [the language] means, and that is a problem in and of itself, because if teachers and librarians and other educators face discipline for violating that law, and they don’t know what the law means, that’s a due process problem.”
She noted that the laws have been and are being challenged on grounds of vagueness, and for violating the First Amendment.
Banned Books Week, which library activist Judith Krug founded in 1982, will culminate in “Let Freedom Read Day” on Saturday, on which organizers urge people to take at least one action to defend the freedom to read, such as participating in this year’s elections.
Caldwell-Stone emphasized the importance of being engaged at all levels of government.
“This is an intensely local issue,” she said. “While we are seeing state legislation intended to engage in broad censorship across the state, primarily these decisions are made at the local level.”
Moreover, PEN America, which tracks each instance of a book ban, recorded a preliminary total of more than 10,000 books banned in public schools during the 2023-2024 school year in a preliminary count, nearly triple the amount from the previous year.
Throughout the week, filmmaker Ava DuVernay and student activist Julia Garnett, the honorary chairs of this year’s Banned Books Week, are discussing the various ways people can stand up against censorship attempts in virtual events accessible through the Banned Books Week website.
Libraries in D.C. and across the nation, meanwhile, are hosting readings, art exhibitions, and other activities to educate families about the freedom to read.
The Anne Arundel County Public Library system on Wednesday held an event to celebrate its launch as a “book sanctuary,” designating its libraries as “safe havens where the freedom to read is fiercely protected.”
Caldwell-Stone recommends those who are interested in countering up to censorship efforts view the action toolkit available at www.uniteagainstbookbans.org and the ALA’s “Reader. Voter. Ready.” guide at www.ala.org.
The White House
Trump tells Fox News he won the ‘gay vote’ — but polls tell a different story
Trump falsely claims LGBTQ support on Fox despite polling showing overwhelming opposition.
President Donald Trump claimed he won the “gay vote” in 2024, despite evidence showing otherwise.
While appearing by phone on Fox News’s panel show “The Five” on Thursday, Trump falsely claimed he performed particularly well among gay voters while discussing the ongoing war in Iran — a conflict he initiated without formal congressional approval.
“Now I think I did very well with the gay vote, OK? I even played the gay national anthem as my walk-off, OK?” Trump said on air.
“And I think it probably helped me. But I did great. No Republican’s ever gotten the gay vote like I did and I’m very proud of it, I think it’s great. Perhaps it’s because I’m from New York City, I don’t know…”
His claim contradicts 2024 polling from NBC News, which found that the GOP presidential ticket captured fewer than 1 in 5 LGBTQ male voters — a figure that may also include bisexual and transgender men. Trump’s support among LGBTQ female voters was even lower, at just 8%.
White LGBTQ voters favored Vice President Kamala Harris over Trump by a margin of 82% to 16%, while LGBTQ voters of color backed Harris by an even wider 91% to 5%.
Trump also used the appearance to criticize “Gays for Palestine,” saying: “Look at ‘Gays for Palestine’… they kill gays, they kill them instantly, they throw them off buildings, and I’m saying, ‘Who are the gays for Palestine?’”
He further pointed to his campaign’s use of the song “Y.M.C.A.” by the Village People — which he has repeatedly described as a “gay national anthem” — noting that it was frequently used as a walk-off song at rallies, as an indication that he and his campaign were supported by the gay community. The track, long associated with camp and hyper-masculine gay imagery, became a staple of Trump campaign events.
The Village People were later booked to perform at Turning Point USA’s inaugural ball celebrating Trump’s second inauguration. Lead singer Victor Willis previously criticized Trump’s use of the song dating back to 2020 and considered legal action to block it, but ultimately said there was “not much he can do about it.” He later acknowledged the renewed exposure was “beneficial” and “good for business,” boosting the song’s popularity and chart performance.
Despite Trump’s claims of strong support from gay voters, polling has consistently shown otherwise — even as several prominent gay men have held roles in or around his orbit, sometimes dubbed the “A-gays.” These include Richard Grenell, former executive director of the Kennedy Center and Special Presidential Envoy for Special Missions; Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent; Under Secretary of State Jacob Helberg; Department of Energy official Charles T. Moran; and longtime supporter Peter Thiel, co-founder and CEO of Palantir.
His efforts to portray himself as aligned with the gay community stand in conflict with policies advanced under his leadership. These include removing LGBTQ-related data from State Department reports, attempting to narrowly redefine gender identity in federal policy, restricting access to gender-affirming health care, and rolling back anti-discrimination protections. His administration also rescinded initiatives focused on LGBTQ health equity, data collection, and nondiscrimination in health care and education — moves advocates say contribute to stigma and worsen mental health outcomes.
Additionally, some HIV programs and community health centers have lost funding from the federal government after supporting initiatives inclusive of transgender people as a direct result of Trump-Vance policies.
National
Anti-trans visa ruling echoes Nazi regime destroying trans documents
Trump administration escalates attacks on queer community
The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention and Human Security earlier this month released its third Red Flag Alert for the United States about the Trump administration’s anti-trans legislation. As the Lemkin Institute shared in the press release, “the Administration has moved from identifying transgender people as as threat to the family and to the nation’s military prowess to claiming that transgender people constitute a cosmic threat to the spiritual health of the nation and the great direct threat to the US national security in the world.”
The news came the same day that the State Department issued a new rule, “Enhancing Vetting and Combatting Fraud in the Immigrant Visa Program.” Under this new guidance, all visa applicants are required to disclose their “biological sex at birth” during all stages of the process, “even if that differs from the sex listed on the applicant’s foreign passport or identifying documentation.”
This rule also orders that applicants to the green card lottery program share their passport information, so in knowingly collecting passport information that the agency knows will not match a person’s biological sex at birth, it’s creating grounds to deny trans peoples’ biases on the basis of “fraud,” Aleksandra Vaca of Transitics explains.
As is written in the new ruling, “the Department is replacing ‘gender’ with ‘sex’ in accordance with E.O. 14168, Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government, which provides that the term ‘sex’ shall refer to an individual’s sex at birth. Only male and female sex options are available for entrants completing the Diversity Visa entry form.”
Along with outright denying the existence of nonbinary, genderqueer and gender expansive people, this policy creates a precedence for trans people to be stripped of their visas and deported because under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i), any foreigner found to have obtained or possess a visa “by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact” will have their visa revoked and face deportation.
By requesting information on “biological sex at birth,” the State Department is forcing a mismatch between documents and enabling officials to accuse trans, nonbinary, and gender expansive immigrants of fraud. Thus, trans and nonbinary immigrants can have their visas revoked and can be deported, and information gathered from immigrants during the visa request process can be added to federal databases and used by immigration authorities, including ICE agents.
With the Supreme Court’s decision this past year allowing ICE officers to use racial profiling, Vaca argues that “now, The Trump administration has given ICE the reason it needs. Under this rule, ICE agents now have the enforcement rationale to assert that trans people–especially those belonging to racial minority groups–are more likely than cis people to have ‘misrepresented’ themselves during the visa process, and therefore, are more likely to enter the country ‘unlawfully.’”
This would enable ICE agents to target trans individuals specifically for being trans. If the goal of this were unclear, a day later the Trump administration released its statement for Women’s History Month 2026, writing that “we are keeping men out of women’s sports, enforcing Title IX as it was originally written and ensuring colleges preserve–and, where possible, expand–scholarships and roster opportunities for female athletes. We are restoring public safety and upholding the rule of law in every city so women, children, and families can feel safe and secure.”
And this is not the first time that ICE has targeted and harmed trans and nonbinary immigrants. Last June, Vera reported that ICE is not including trans people in detection in their public reports, and back in 2020, AFSC reported that trans people held in ICE detention faced “dreadful, ugly” conditions.
While it seems like a new development in Trump’s anti-trans escalation, it echoes a deeply upsetting history of denying and destroying transgender people’s documents following members of the Nazi party seizing power in 1933.
In the early 20th century, Weimar, Germany was an epicenter for gender affirming care with Maganus Hirschfeld’s Institute for Sexual Science. One of the first book burnings of the rising Nazi regime destroyed the Institute’s extensive clinical records and library on trans health and history by Nazi students and stormtroopers. In doing so, the Nazis effectively destroyed the world’s first trans health clinic and one of the richest and most comprehensive collective of information about trans healthcare.
Similarly, the Nazi government invalidated or refused to recognize what was called “transvestite passes,” or passing certificates that allowed trans people to avoid arrest under Paragraph 175 which prohibited cross-dressing. During the Weimar Republic — the regime that preceded the Third Reich — recognized and affirmed the identities of trans people (in limited ways) with specific documentation that helped prevent them from arrest. Invalidating and disregarding these passes allowed police and Nazi officials to target trans people and harass, extort and arrest them, and the record of passes themselves helped officials target trans people.
The changes to visa guidelines — alongside Kansas’s move to revoke trans drivers’ licenses last month — is reflective of this escalation of violence against trans people during the Nazi’s rise to power, which scholars like Dr. Laurie Marhoefer is just beginning to uncover. And along with the revocation of identification documents this past week, a recent Fourth Circuit Court ruled that states can deny Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery.
The Fourth Circuit Court decision affirmed the Supreme Court’s decision in Skrmetti, which ruled that bans on gender affirming healthcare for young people are constitutional. This ruling extends this ban to include adult healthcare bans, allowing West Virginia’s exclusion of Medicaid coverage for adult gender affirming healthcare to take full effect. Even more upsetting was what the ruling itself said, calling gender affirming healthcare “dangerous.”
As was written in the Fourth Circuit Opinion, “it’s not irrational for a legislature to encourage citizens ‘to appreciate their sex’ and not ‘become disdainful of their sex’ by refusing to fund experimental procedures that may have the opposite effect.”
In reality, what this ruling and the opinion reflect, is the next step in government regulation and oversight over marginalized peoples’ bodies. From the overturn of Roe v. Wade, which removed federal protection of access to abortion, this next step represents the denial of people’s access to vital, lifesaving care–and to be clear, gender affirming care is not just for trans, nonbinary, and intersex people. It’s a dangerous escalation and one that echoes previous violence against trans people under fascist regimes; the Lemkin Institute is right to raise concern.
Pennsylvania
Pa. House passes bill to codify marriage equality in state law
Governor supports gay state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta’s measure
The Pennsylvania House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill that would codify marriage equality in state law.
House Bill 1800 passed by a 127-72 vote margin. Twenty-six Republicans voted for the measure.
The Republican-controlled Pennsylvania Senate will now consider the bill that state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta (D-Philadelphia), who is the first openly gay person of color elected to the state’s General Assembly, introduced. Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro supports the measure.
“Here in Pennsylvania, we believe in your freedom to marry who you love,” said Shapiro on Wednesday. “Today, the House has stepped up to protect that right.”
BREAKING: The Pennsylvania House just passed @RepKenyatta's bill to codify marriage equality into law in PA — and they did it with broad bipartisan support.
— Governor Josh Shapiro (@GovernorShapiro) March 25, 2026
Here in Pennsylvania, we believe in your freedom to marry who you love. Today, the House has stepped up to protect that…
‘Jonah’ an undeniably compelling but unusual memory play
The Oscar-losing performance that’s too good to miss
Trump tells Fox News he won the ‘gay vote’ — but polls tell a different story
Anti-trans visa ruling echoes Nazi regime destroying trans documents
Japanese Supreme Court to consider marriage equality
D.C. goes gaga for Gaga
Menaka Guruswamy celebrated as India’s first openly LGBTQ MP
HRC to host National Rainbow Seder
UPDATED: Trans-led HIV clinic in Portsmouth struggles amid funding cuts
